Well said.
Just a thought here. This is based on what metric?
As I recall, if you look at subs, WotLK was the most popular expansion to this day.
Ofc the class design alone did not serve as the sole reason for said peak in subs. But a lot of players did indeed enjoy it in general.
But either way, yes, a 4th spec and there would be no more of these tiring debates/arguments. We all get to play what we want.
WotLK was more popular than TBC. Even if TBC had more subs it would not validate TBC class design as the gold standard because frankly TBC Hunter design was extremely dated and unpolished even for the time.
All your suggestions for Survival are frankly horrific. Keep them to yourself, please.
The fact that itâs in that state shows that it needs work and that is exactly the purpose of this thread and forums in general. Weâre here to offer our ideas to the devs, and what Iâve described here would reinvigorate Survival and make it viable.
Before it got dumbed down into current form, Survival was fantastic in PvP, especially anything involving flagging. I was able to severely slow and immobilize entire groups of people at certain chokepoints on the map, halting advances in Alterac Valley, or allowing flaggers to make their escape in Warsong. With a coordinated group AoEing the hell out of them, those traps came in handy. I put healers on ice for longer periods of time thanks to trap talents, then put them to sleep with Wyvern Sting. And of course rapid damage over time with enough Mastery will help your burst dps teammates finish people off.
Granted, I didnât always get thanks for it because the average player doesnât understand anything past damage charts. Itâs the same reason Solider 76 doesnât get respect in Overwatch, or Ret Paladins back in vanilla - people donât understand that Hybrids are not designed to score MAD DAMAAAGE on the dps charts, theyâre designed to play multiple class functions to a lesser extent than the specialists.
CC is critical to any real PvP fight, so Survival was amazing.
How do you think the game reached that point of popularity? TBC, my son, TBC.
As for your poorly articulated opinion of my ideas, youâre allowed to have it because Iâm not a dictator like you apparently, but donât tell people what they can and canât post on the forums.
Support your statement: Why are my ideas horrific? If youâre gonna post anything, then back it up. Oh thatâs right, you canât. Iâm guessing the reason is because you like simplistic, bland, button mashing specs that only require two or more keys to do most of the work.
Personally I think Survival Hunters should be Healers with pet support think Ana from Overwatch as a spec for hunters. Their kite should consent of Anti-heals, weak healing, and temporarily buffs that increase allies healing they receive with a damage boost buff. Pets should be weak buffers Cunning increases crit to the party/raid, Ferocity increases attack/spell speed, Tenacity increases stamina/damage resistances to everyone.
Thatâs not a bad idea at all, and Iâve played Ana with the thought of her being a Survival Hunter in mind lol. I think that could at least make for some good talent options if the person wants to spec into it. We could marry the two ideas by making DoT damage and healing linked. Mastery would increase the DoT damage and thus heals along with it. Traps are used as group cc support to further protect the team from harm and sabotage the enemy. Great suggestion!
PS: It would still need the focus regeneration to come from DoTs in order for it to function, but yes, I like the fresh perspective you brought to this.
That does not make TBC the most popular expansion.
You think the deadzone was a good thing. Enough said right there. It was a repulsive mechanic that most Hunters were happy to see go yet you want to drag it back in.
P.S. Just so you know, âinterestingâ is like the positive equivalent of âclunkyâ yet perhaps even less specific and more vague. Itâs the go-to diplomatic complement everyone uses to try to make bad design decisions look good.
Reminder: you say this while propping up an iteration of the Hunter class where all three specs more or less operated using the same Steady Shot weaving rotation which was optimally executed entirely with one castsequence macro.
Maybe thatâs the reason you want BC Hunter so bad: you might be able to finally clear LFR by playing a spec where you can execute the optimal DPS priority with your scroll wheel alone.
I mean, by this logic you could argue Vanilla was the most popular. TBC was built on Vanilla. No Vanilla no TBC, No Wrath, No Game.
It does because TBC is what put WoW on the map. The hype was legendary for that expansion and Wrath road on the tail of it, bringing back a beloved story and drawing in more crowds.
The dead zone was a realistic limitation and thatâs what made it interesting. Meanwhile clunky is usually the result of poorly thought out mechanics and an over dependency on gear. Clearly youâve never fired a weapon before and donât understand that shooting at that range with a rifle or bow is impractical. Especially when being rushed by multiple targets, which is why people switch to bladed weapons, or just smash their enemy with the butt of their rifle.
Thereâs nothing vague about it.
I donât use cast sequence macros because I deem that unskilled and lazy. Unless youâre talking about linking up my healing potions with Exhilaration or damage trinkets with offensive cooldowns, then no I donât use that garbage.
I have no interest in or time for raiding anymore, and gear gathering is merely a tedious necessity for world PvP. I want TBC hunter because it was fun and had tactical abilities that transcended gear. It was more intelligent and not weighed down by bs secondary stats and global cooldowns that ruined the game with an overdependency on gear.
These days some specs donât even work right until youâre max gear, and some become overpowered garbage when you have too much of it. Take Demon Hunters and Fire Mages right now who exploit secondary stats to become OP as hell. This game in general needs to be more based on skill, reflexes, and intelligence, way less about gear grinding and numbers.
Iâm looking for a spec thatâs more interactive, talent charts that leave more room for innovation, and a spec with meaningful abilities that make a difference in battle beyond HULK SMASH.
Nope, because TBC is what drew massive numbers in. The player base exploded, then Wrath came out. It wasnât Wrath that made the game.
lol, you realize that by the time Vanilla ended there were over 4 million people playing wow right?
The player base was exploding since the start of Vanilla.
this statement alone makes me think you do not actually know what deadzone is/was. It is a distance to your target where you cannot use anything
Either you werenât there or never caught on that you use your melee attacks in the deadzone, which is what Survival Hunter is perfectly designed for. Iâm guessing you were one of the MM hunters I used to abuse.
No, no.
In Vanilla and BC, your melee attack had a range of 5 yards.
Your ranged attacks had a minimum range of 8 yards.
That means in that tiny little range of 5-8 yards, Hunters could do nothing.
PvPers shamelessly took advantage of this.
Thatâs one of the reasons the deadzone went away.
I guess you guys never used scattershot, feign death, bombs, or trap launcher later on lol. By the time TBC rolled around, I just feigned and tossed an ice trap or stun grenade in their face. The Deadzone doesnât exist for good hunters.
Yup⌠I was right.
You talk like no other class player can be goodâŚ
TBC did bring in a lot of new players indeed. However, the number of subs at the end of TBC was about half that of the peak numbers during the middle of WotLK.
Again, is WotLK class design/changes the sole reason for why so many subbed during this particular expansion? Again, no. Ofc not.
But it was most certainly a big factor.
TBC did improve on a lot of things that were considered worse in Vanilla. However, WoW, is what put WoW on the map. TBC further built on the momentum that originated from Vanilla. And then WotLK took it even further.
Both yes and no, more specifically the limitations put on ranged weapons. It realized a game based version of something that you might find difficult to deal with IRL(utilizing ranged weapons vs a target which is up in your face is/can be tricky).
Having said that, thereâs nothing that actually supports the idea that you simply cannot use a ranged weapon against a target which is up close. Ofc you can use it. Itâs just a matter of personal limitiations as to whether you can manage it or not.
Iâd say that the biggest problem today with class design is how we rely on external systems, containing borrowed powers, for a class/spec to actually feel somewhat complete on a fundamental level.
The gear itself and secondary stats do their part towards smoothing things out. But the lack of such, is IMO not the biggest issue.
Counted with subs as the metric, and if you take into consideration at what point in time when the most people subbed to the game, in a certain period, then WotLK was indeed the most popular expansion.
Simply because all those additional subs came during the first half of WotLK. They did not come at the end of TBC.
Wrong.
The âdeadzoneâ refers to the range from your target that was 5-8 yards.
If a target was within that range, you could neither use melee attacks nor ranged attacks against them(that were based on equipped weapons).
Melee weapons could be used against targets up to 5 yards from you, while ranged weapons could not be used unless the target was more than 8 yards away from you.
Hence why it was called the âdeadâ zone. Because you could not attack as long as they remained in it.
Those have nothing to do with attack range aspects of different weapon types.
Nor with the deadzone. That only refers to either melee weapons or ranged weapons.
Not anymore no.
Wrong on both counts. Deadzone exploitation almost never worked because any hunter who was well prepared had a zillion counters for it. Scattershot, trap launcher, feign death, stun grenades, fear drums, and now we even have masterâs call to get out of it. So yeah, Deadzone is for PUSSIES!
I think lack of gear is a disaster and the game is too focused on it.
Well I suppose if you want to split hairs then yes, that little 3 yard, practically non-existent space is technically the deadzone, but it almost never worked. Not for any hunter worth their salt that is. Like I said, the deadzone doesnât exist for good hunters and never did.
This guy has to be trolling at this point. To be so wrong about nearly everything and keep pushing forward⌠boggles the mind.
Your argument towards it was pointing at the min attack range on ranged weapons and how that affected our gameplay and how it had a realistic design to it.
Your argument was essentially âthat you consider the deadzone to be an example good design because it had a realistic factor to itâ.
In truth, there is no such thing as a deadzone IRL. And for regular hand-held firearms and bows etc, there isnât even a min attack range. The only limitation to them in regards to the above, is in the user.
As for the mechanics in-game that involved either the deadzone and/or the min attack range, it entirely depended on the players involved in the fights.
But no matter the skill level of players involved, the mechanics themselves, sure, they promoted a change of gameplay dependent on circumstances. But that was really the only perceived upside, that it allowed for a change of pace and thought process for players.
Besides, something like that simply would not work in the modern game. Not without a major redesign to hunter specs/the class as a whole.
And even with that, we also have all the other classes and their individual mechanics which heavily benefit from the above.
Simply put, the modern game is not designed for something like a min attack range or a deadzone to work.
Who are you talking to? And if itâs about my topic, whatâs wrong with it? Gotta learn to back up what youâre saying with logic.
You do realize that the deadzone wasnât part of my initial premise right? And that I was merely joking about being willing to take it back if it meant I got to TBC hunter again. In any case it was a fun limitation for the time, though I wouldnât be a strong advocate for it now. My initial premise is what Iâm after.
Firing a bow or single shot rifle at close range is not as easy as you think. especially when someone is already in your face, but either way who cares. The point is a modern version of the TBC hunter would be fun.
I never said that it was easy. In fact, I said the exact opposite.
My point with the idea of having a min range-restriction on our ranged weapons or even something like deadzone is that, while it probably was their way of realizing the difficulties of using firearms and such in close quarter combat, it was done in a horrible and tedious way which did not accurately reflect anything from real life anyway.
Hence why it was IMO bad design.
That would ofc depend a lot on who you ask.
TBC is arguably the expansion I miss the most of all. However, itâs not because of how the hunter class was designed(or class design in general).
Donât get me wrong, I very much enjoyed playing a hunter in TBC.
I just found the additions for our talent categories which we got with WotLK to be very fun, and they essentially began the era of hunter class design which I personally enjoyed the most. Meaning the period from WotLK - WoD(end of).
Was it perfect? No, ofc not.